# Why Doesn't Gawith Hoggarth Match-Up to Samuel Gawith



## CWL (Mar 25, 2010)

Y'all,

Yes, there's no SG left to be found in any quantity in North America, but why is it that there is still plenty of GH around?

I'll admit that I haven't taken-up the briar for very long, but it seems to me that many of the mixtures that GH sells are almost the "spittin' image" of what SG sells, yet there isn't as great a demand for it.

Is SH really THAT much better, or are we just a bunch of lemmings and chase after tobaccos that are in fashion at the moment?


----------



## GuitarDan (Nov 26, 2009)

G&H doesn't make anything close to Cob plug or Grousemoor plug; and those are the only two I care about.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

With the exception of FVF, I think G&H blends are far better than Sam Gawith, but I think I'm probably in the minority. I like the Lakeland "floral" scenting, and the biggest difference between the two companies seems to be that G&H embraces those types of flavorings while SG is far more conservative.
To each their own!


----------



## lestrout (Dec 10, 2007)

GH has little presence on the Latakia side of blends. For instance, SG has Squadron Leader, Skiff, and Commonwealth, and GH has no equivalent I can recall. However, GH's Lakelands, even the relatively unscented ones, are fabulous, if your taste runs in that vein.

GH also seems to be more represented in bulks stocked at the tobacconist level. I've seen it in Oakland's Piedmont Tobacconist, Boston's Peretti's and Maryland's Davidus.

hp
les


----------



## drastic_quench (Sep 12, 2008)

Do they make anything like Bracken Flake?


----------



## commonsenseman (Apr 18, 2008)

In my opinion, the reason that SG sells out so much more is that there is no equivalent for FVF, Bracken, 1792, St James Flake & several others. G&H blends are completely different, I don't taste any "lakeland" in SG, while it's pretty strong in most G&H blends. Granted, it's all up to what you prefer, but it seems that a lot more people prefer SG. 

I personally like some stuff from both of them, but if given a choice, I'd take SG over G&H any day.


----------



## CWL (Mar 25, 2010)

drastic_quench said:


> Do they make anything like Bracken Flake?


Well, they do offer Broken Scotch Flake, which I imagine is similar.


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

Most of the stuff that is lakeland scented by GH that I have tried is also available in an unscented version. Just an FYI for people who don't like it.

As to the original question, they are different companies with different offerings. GH has no reason to try to duplicate SG blends. GH is a very successful tobacco blender that has been around for I believe well over a century after they "split" from SG, and if I had to guess I'd wager that of the two, they're doing more business right now. While most people on this forum are SG lovers, very many pipe smokers will tell you SG is the inferior tobacco house of the two. Personally I think each company has its strong suits. One of the main reasons you see GH in stock everywhere and SG sold out is that SG is having production/distribution problems right now.


----------



## Hermit (Aug 5, 2008)

I can't stand soapy Lakelands and I hate 1792.
FVF is pretty much their only blend I care about.
St. James Flake is another.


----------



## lestrout (Dec 10, 2007)

drastic_quench said:


> Do they make anything like Bracken Flake?


For my Virginias project, I've been working my way through a couple dozen SG and GH blends. Sniffing the SG Bracken Flake and GH Broken Scotch Cake, the former has pungency lighter than 1792, whereas the BSC is more neutral and Virginian. My puffing notes show the BF is pretty strong and an evening smoke for me, whereas the BSF is an all-dayer, even breakfast time. Visually, the BF is much darker.

hp
les


----------



## FiveStar (Jan 7, 2010)

drastic_quench said:


> Do they make anything like Bracken Flake?


Dark flake unscented! Get yoself some my brotha!


----------



## lestrout (Dec 10, 2007)

FiveStar said:


> Dark flake unscented! Get yoself some my brotha!


GH Dark Flake Unscented came in the same TAD with my Bracken. They are similarly strong and tasty, but the Bracken has that floral scent in the bag. I've sniffed Dark Flake Scented, but haven't gotten around to trying any. The aroma is in the same general ballpark, but still distinctly different.

hp
les


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

Yeah the Dark Flake scented is not quite like the topping on Bracken Flake, but in the grand scheme of things they are in the same ballpark. I like both the scented and unscented versions.


----------



## FiveStar (Jan 7, 2010)

Yeah, this is why I didn't like Bracken Flake. I guess maybe the scented is more like bracken? Both very strong dark smokes. Some folks claim Bracken doesn't have a topping, but I didn't dig it back a few months ago. However, I've come to love 1792, so may have to revisit Bracken!


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

According to Samuel Gawith Bracken Flake has a topping, a "long used essence" as they put it. Both have similar tobaccos underneath, very dark. The Dark Flake is the darkest of the dark, IMO. As far as the flavor, while the bracken flake to me has a sort of medicinal, vaguely minty taste to me (which I love), the dark flake scented is more of a straight up floral aroma literally like something out of Crabtree & Evelyn or L'Occitane. It's worth trying an ounce of, if only to say, "Huh, so this is lakeland essence."


----------



## commonsenseman (Apr 18, 2008)

Jack Straw said:


> .....It's worth trying an ounce of, if only to say, "Huh, so this is lakeland essence."


Agreed.

I found Brown Flake (I ordered unscented) has a VERY strong Lakeland Essence to it, enough that I was put off by it. I'm suspicious that I may have received the scented version though.


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

commonsenseman said:


> Agreed.
> 
> I found Brown Flake (I ordered unscented) has a VERY strong Lakeland Essence to it, enough that I was put off by it. I'm suspicious that I may have received the scented version though.


I think the dealer had to have mixed it up - I have some and it doesn't have any of that smell/taste. I did find that if you leave the GH tobacco in an old SG tin (sacrilege, I know) to dry out a bit for a week, the topping subsides a bit to a more "meld with the tobacco" type level, rather than being in your face.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

doctorthoss said:


> With the exception of FVF, I think G&H blends are far better than Sam Gawith, but I think I'm probably in the minority. I like the Lakeland "floral" scenting, and the biggest difference between the two companies seems to be that G&H embraces those types of flavorings while SG is far more conservative.
> To each their own!


i'm with you. they have a ton of great tobaccos, not all of them are "lakeland" as well. they have plenty of VA/pers to choose from, strong VAs, and their ropes and lakeland blends are great (i prefer their ropes of SGs).



lestrout said:


> GH has little presence on the Latakia side of blends. For instance, SG has Squadron Leader, Skiff, and Commonwealth, and GH has no equivalent I can recall. However, GH's Lakelands, even the relatively unscented ones, are fabulous, if your taste runs in that vein.
> 
> GH also seems to be more represented in bulks stocked at the tobacconist level. I've seen it in Oakland's Piedmont Tobacconist, Boston's Peretti's and Maryland's Davidus.
> 
> ...


i agree about the amount of bulks being a reason, some people just won't buy bulks, only tins.



CWL said:


> Well, they do offer Broken Scotch Flake, which I imagine is similar.


not even remotely close to Bracken Flake.



FiveStar said:


> Dark flake unscented! Get yoself some my brotha!


love this stuff, both unscented and scented.


----------



## slyder (Mar 17, 2009)

I just tried GH Balkan Mixture yesterday...........ewwww!! Nothing like any of the balkans ive tried......my favorite being SG Balkan Flake.


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

I mostly prefer SG's absence of Lakeland soap essence, but SG doesn't have anything in it's stable that I smoke nearly as much as I smoke G&H's Kendal Kentucky.

Recently compared the two chocolate flakes and found SG's much more to my liking.

That said, I bow to the broader experience of my fellow pipesters on these two blending houses. I've probably sampled fewer than 6 blends apiece from them.


----------



## CWL (Mar 25, 2010)

IHT said:


> not even remotely close to Bracken Flake.


Ok, so you've got me interested, I'm trading for a full pound of Bracken Flake based on your comment!


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

commonsenseman said:


> In my opinion, the reason that SG sells out so much more is that there is no equivalent for FVF, Bracken, 1792, St James Flake & several others. G&H blends are completely different, I don't taste any "lakeland" in SG, while it's pretty strong in most G&H blends. Granted, it's all up to what you prefer, but it seems that a lot more people prefer SG.
> 
> I personally like some stuff from both of them, but if given a choice, I'd take SG over G&H any day.


Your preferences seem consistent with most smokers I know, as the Lakeland floral thing seems to really repulse a lot of people while the more "natural" approach of SG appeals to the majority, at least here in the U.S. Personally, I wonder if this is a question of tastes in the U.S. versus the U.K.

Something like Ennerdale Flake is probably completely foreign to U.S. taste buds, as most of us have grown up associating aromatics with the likes of Capt. Black or 1Q. I get the impression that's not necessarily the case overseas, although I don't have firsthand knowledge of that.

I wonder if anyone from the UK might chime in here?

Personally, I avoided the Lakelands until this year as I simply couldn't wrap my head around something that smells like roses or perfume. I've been trying to quit cigs, however, and I'd heard enough about the strength of and supposedly "non-biting" nature GH's products to finally break down and order some samples. I was REALLY surprised that I like them so much, although I can definitely see why some guys despise them.


----------



## Spectabalis (May 17, 2010)

As you rightly said John (Doctorthoss), it is a taste thing between our two countries. We don't tend to go for the full, what I would call "in your face aromatics" here as they aren't very popular. We don't have Captain Black, 1Q, or most of your other aromatic blends available either, the one's we have are sold as "American Style Aromatics".
Also,from my experience, pipesmoking is more popular in the U.S. than over here. It is extremely rare to find a young person with a pipe here, in fact I don't know any at all. The attitude to pipesmoking is also different, mainly looked upon as an "old man's pastime". In fact there is a saying here if anyone is accused of getting on in years, namely;-
"I'm not ready for my pipe and slippers yet!"
Most people start pipesmoking here with our OTC's, namely St Bruno, Condor, Digger and tobaccos of that ilk.
Roger.


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

This may seem stupid, but don't underestimate the power of marketing, even if it's just in the form of tin art. G&H tins are boring! I think we'd all be surprised at just how many consumer goods we prefer because of their packaging. SG tins are often very colorful and depict something antique-y and interesting.


----------



## CWL (Mar 25, 2010)

Spectabalis said:


> Also,from my experience, pipesmoking is more popular in the U.S. than over here. It is extremely rare to find a young person with a pipe here, in fact I don't know any at all. The attitude to pipesmoking is also different, mainly looked upon as an "old man's pastime". In fact there is a saying here if anyone is accused of getting on in years, namely;-
> "I'm not ready for my pipe and slippers yet!"
> Roger.


I think this is also accurate for the US as it is for the UK.


----------



## CWL (Mar 25, 2010)

> Your preferences seem consistent with most smokers I know, as the Lakeland floral thing seems to really repulse a lot of people while the more "natural" approach of SG appeals to the majority, at least here in the U.S. Personally, I wonder if this is a question of tastes in the U.S. versus the U.K.
> 
> Something like Ennerdale Flake is probably completely foreign to U.S. taste buds, as most of us have grown up associating aromatics with the likes of Capt. Black or 1Q. I get the impression that's not necessarily the case overseas, although I don't have firsthand knowledge of that.


Speaking of that "Lakeland floral thing", anyone else beside me in the USA has tried this stuff? I bought it on a whim during a business trip because it just looked "nasty". IMHO, it tastes like trying to eat a bar of ladies soap. Yes it has that "Lakeland" essence. Yuck!


----------



## mbearer (Jun 2, 2010)

CWL said:


> Speaking of that "Lakeland floral thing", anyone else beside me in the USA has tried this stuff? I bought it on a whim during a business trip because it just looked "nasty". IMHO, it tastes like trying to eat a bar of ladies soap. Yes it has that "Lakeland" essence. Yuck!


Really? I think that is all I can say... REALLY?!?! Someone thought that would be a good idea?

Morbid Curiosity I would of had to buy them too LOL  Maybe that is what keeps them in business. 
Mike


----------



## commonsenseman (Apr 18, 2008)

I agree with John about taste preferences differing between here, & across the pond. When I first tried a Lakeland I was thinking "what the crap is this?" Grousemoor is some strange stuff indeed.

I forgot to mention before a couple blends that are fairly similar between SG & G&H. Both of their Chocolate Flakes are fairly similar, I only very slightly prefer the SG version. Also their brown ropes are similar. In a blind taste test, I dunno if I could tell the difference. :dunno:


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

commonsenseman said:


> I forgot to mention before a couple blends that are fairly similar between SG & G&H. Both of their Chocolate Flakes are fairly similar, I only very slightly prefer the SG version. Also their brown ropes are similar. In a blind taste test, I dunno if I could tell the difference. :dunno:


I found large differences in their chocolate flakes. The SG had more chocolate aroma and less Lakeland soap in the taste. I found it much preferable to the G&H. The SG seems to have more latakia flavor as well. I was a bit surprised at how different they were.

Then again, I didn't smoke them back to back and memory is a fleeting thing. I had to compare tasting notes, so who knows how accurate that is. Still, I give the SG a solid 4 stars and the G&H only 2. I'm sensitive to the Lakeland "floral" taste - ugh!


----------



## commonsenseman (Apr 18, 2008)

dmkerr said:


> I found large differences in their chocolate flakes. The SG had more chocolate aroma and less Lakeland soap in the taste. I found it much preferable to the G&H. The SG seems to have more latakia flavor as well. I was a bit surprised at how different they were.
> 
> Then again, I didn't smoke them back to back and memory is a fleeting thing. I had to compare tasting notes, so who knows how accurate that is. Still, I give the SG a solid 4 stars and the G&H only 2. I'm sensitive to the Lakeland "floral" taste - ugh!


Hmm, interesting. Perhaps I need to revisit Bob's Chocolate Flake, because I didn't notice a heavy Lakeland influence. I thought both of them hid the Latakia fairly well, it seemed to accent the flavor rather than take over.

Well, I guess I'll have to do an extensive side-by-side comparison. It'll be hard work, but it's worth it for the sake of science! :biggrin:


----------



## CWL (Mar 25, 2010)

commonsenseman said:


> Hmm, interesting. Perhaps I need to revisit Bob's Chocolate Flake, because I didn't notice a heavy Lakeland influence. I thought both of them hid the Latakia fairly well, it seemed to accent the flavor rather than take over.
> 
> Well, I guess I'll have to do an extensive side-by-side comparison. It'll be hard work, but it's worth it for the sake of science! :biggrin:


I've got pounds of GH Bob's Chocolate & SG Mayors Chocolate and neither of them has a very strong lakeland presence to me, certainly not when compared to Ennerdale flakes or a Grousemoor plug. Also, for me, the GH has more of a chocolaty aftertaste. No noticeable latakia in either.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

those two "chocolate" flakes aren't even remotely close to one another, aside from having the word "chocolate" in their names.


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

CWL said:


> I've got pounds of GH Bob's Chocolate & SG Mayors Chocolate and neither of them has a very strong lakeland presence to me, certainly not when compared to Ennerdale flakes or a Grousemoor plug. Also, for me, the GH has more of a chocolaty aftertaste. No noticeable latakia in either.


It helps if you have a sensitivity to Lakeland flavorings and latakia both!

Compared to several other Lakelands, I would agree with you. But I found the G&H barely tolerable due to that taste, which I prefer to call "soapy" as opposed to "floral". Just my 'buds. The latakia is faint, but there. It tends to pop out at various times - not really an overall latakia taste. But if that stuff is in a blend, I'll find it. Not sure why - it's not like my taste buds are anymore refined than anyone else's. All I can figure is that I have a special sensitivity to it, as well as the Lakeland topping.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

i think the GH product has about 80% of the african/malawi fire cured leaf in there (based on the product description), which i think a lot of ppl attribute to the "lakeland" flavor (at least that's what i keep observing - blends with high fire cured african leaf get the "lakeland" label even if it's not topped).
this blend, on the other hand, does have some toppings added.


----------



## CWL (Mar 25, 2010)

I just smoked 2 bowls of SG Mayor's Chocolate and there is no "lakeland" essence that I can make out, it smells and tastes of virginia and latakia, no chocolate either.

I finished-off some GH Bob's Flake last week and I could detect some chocolate and a creamy texture that I attribute to the latakia. I also took a good "whiff" of a box of Bob's Choco that I have on-hand and it doesn't have any "lakeland" smell to it, it does have a "funky" scent though.

Opening a jar of Grousemoor Plug, I have a Lakeland reference to use, and this has that floral/soapy smell.


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

IHT said:


> i think the GH product has about 80% of the african/malawi fire cured leaf in there (based on the product description), which i think a lot of ppl attribute to the "lakeland" flavor (at least that's what i keep observing - blends with high fire cured african leaf get the "lakeland" label even if it's not topped).
> this blend, on the other hand, does have some toppings added.


I found the GH heavily flavored with the soap. Not as heavily as some but still too noticeable. As for the rest of the line, I think you're right to some degree but on the other hand I don't taste even a hint of soap in Kendal Kentucky. Dark Flake Unscented does... and perhaps shouldn't.


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

IHT said:


> i think the GH product has about 80% of the african/malawi fire cured leaf in there (based on the product description), which i think a lot of ppl attribute to the "lakeland" flavor (at least that's what i keep observing - blends with high fire cured african leaf get the "lakeland" label even if it's not topped).
> this blend, on the other hand, does have some toppings added.


Upon reflection, I should mention that the soapy taste I get isn't confined to Lakeland blends. I got it from Rattray's Brown Clunee, a couple of the Dobie's Four Square blends and when I did the blind test recently, I mistakenly called TOI Limerick a "Lakeland" blend because I tasted the soap. It turned out to be an Irish Lakeland blended in Germany. ound: Interestingly, another reviewer on TR.com tasted the same soapy flavor in Limerick.

So there's more to this phenomenon than Lakeland toppings. I think you've hit on part of it.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

dmkerr said:


> So there's more to this phenomenon than Lakeland toppings. I think you've hit on part of it.


wasn't questioning your tastebuds and experiences, dan. just a general idea i have about some people who label everything "lakeland" when they're just tasting something new and don't know what to make of it for the first time, and if it's SG or GH, then it must be the essence everyone talks about.

it's been a while since i've had those two blends mentioned, they weren't my bag, baby.


----------



## Roqsan (Oct 17, 2010)

doctorthoss said:


> I wonder if anyone from the UK might chime in here?


I stayed the night in a hotel in the centre of Kendal last week on the way back from a trip to Scotland salmon fishing and whilst there I asked in the bar if anyone knew anything about the Gawith companies. As it happened they'd mostly heard of Gawith & Hoggarth as a snuff maker, but noone had heard of Samuel Gawith... Go figure 

Most tobacconists in the UK - well the few that are left - stock G&H products in large glass tobacco jars. These are mostly somewhat sinister aromatics, peaches and cream and so on, but also for some reason black irish pigtail is popular.

I personally smoke many G&H and Sam Gawith tobaccos and tend to think this whole lakeland floral/soap thing is a bit of a myth and found it somewhat mystifying when I looked on tobacco reviews. Maybe what some people are identifying as a soapy taste is actually due to the curing process of one of the tobaccos that G&H use in blends such as Best Brown 2, Bob's choc flake etc. (but not in others such as brown unscented!) I find that when ordering these tobaccos in bulk they often arrive quite moist and then the medicinal taste is quite overwhelming if smoked immediately. After drying out for a while though the dark tobaccos tend to blend in more and give the tobaccos a darker taste that cools the smoke. I like these tobaccos, but I also like Sam Gawith FVF, BBF, Choc etc and can detect no special "lakeland essence" in these.


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

^Great post, and welcome!


----------



## CaptainEnormous (Sep 30, 2010)

Roqsan said:


> I personally smoke many G&H and Sam Gawith tobaccos and tend to think this whole lakeland floral/soap thing is a bit of a myth and found it somewhat mystifying when I looked on tobacco reviews. Maybe what some people are identifying as a soapy taste is actually due to the curing process of one of the tobaccos that G&H use in blends such as Best Brown 2, Bob's choc flake etc. (but not in others such as brown unscented!) I find that when ordering these tobaccos in bulk they often arrive quite moist and then the medicinal taste is quite overwhelming if smoked immediately. After drying out for a while though the dark tobaccos tend to blend in more and give the tobaccos a darker taste that cools the smoke. I like these tobaccos, but I also like Sam Gawith FVF, BBF, Choc etc and can detect no special "lakeland essence" in these.


Great post. Really informative. I was worried the Tonquin topping (which I don't like in abundance) *was* the Lakeland flavor . . . you've given me confidence to try some G&H offerings.

In the SG products I've bought, I definitely notice the tin moisture. In fact, drying out FVF or Balkan Flake or BBF or Kendal Flake to the point where it's ready to smoke it a bit tricky. And, before you get it there, it all kind of smells similar (lakeland-ey?). But once it's got some age and some drying, they open up beautifully and that familiar similar smell is gone.


----------



## Roqsan (Oct 17, 2010)

Hi everyone!



CaptainEnormous said:


> Great post. Really informative. I was worried the Tonquin topping (which I don't like in abundance) *was* the Lakeland flavor . . . you've given me confidence to try some G&H offerings.
> 
> In the SG products I've bought, I definitely notice the tin moisture. In fact, drying out FVF or Balkan Flake or BBF or Kendal Flake to the point where it's ready to smoke it a bit tricky. And, before you get it there, it all kind of smells similar (lakeland-ey?). But once it's got some age and some drying, they open up beautifully and that familiar similar smell is gone.


I think those particular Sam Gawith blends are mostly based on the same underlying flake with different flavors (e.g. Kendal Cream flake is BBF with some additions etc) so perhaps "Samgawithy" might be more appropriate than "lakelandy" 

I suspect that different people often mean different things when they use "lakeland like" or "lakelandy" and perhaps are confuting a large number of different things that are really quite separate into these terms - as you suggest re SG's 1792 Tonka flavouring. For instance, in some cases people seem to be referring to "soapy" taste and at others to floral overtones. The Kendal companies make such a large range of different tobaccos with different casing and/or top flavouring that it would be hard to take all of them and find some one point of similarity that might be called "lakelandy". It may be that my taste senses are missing something that others can detect, but it does seems unlikely that the Kendal companies would agree to instill some subtle essence of lakeland into all their products, just because they happen to have diverged from the same company many years ago and still be in close proximity. I did check when I was in Kendal that the lakeland air did not have some special floral quality, not found elsewhere in the UK, but (unromantically perhaps) I have to report no essential differences there .


----------



## dmkerr (Oct 27, 2008)

IHT said:


> wasn't questioning your tastebuds and experiences, dan. just a general idea i have about some people who label everything "lakeland" when they're just tasting something new and don't know what to make of it for the first time, and if it's SG or GH, then it must be the essence everyone talks about.
> 
> it's been a while since i've had those two blends mentioned, they weren't my bag, baby.


Labeling is what we pipesmokers do! 

But I was agreeing with you - things tend to take on lives of their own once something gets started. Gives people an excuse to look further.


----------



## CaptainBasil (Nov 25, 2007)

Does Gawith offer anything close to 1792 or Cob Plug.


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

CaptainBasil said:


> Does Gawith offer anything close to 1792 or Cob Plug.


Yes-- Dark Flake scented. 
It's just as powerful, nic-wise, but the base tobaccos are a little earthier. Also, while it is flavored with tonquin like 1792, several other flavoring agents are used which lends it a more complex and satisfying taste (to yours truly, of course).


----------



## doctorthoss (Jun 28, 2010)

*Q*



Roqsan said:


> Hi everyone!
> 
> I think those particular Sam Gawith blends are mostly based on the same underlying flake with different flavors (e.g. Kendal Cream flake is BBF with some additions etc) so perhaps "Samgawithy" might be more appropriate than "lakelandy"
> 
> I suspect that different people often mean different things when they use "lakeland like" or "lakelandy" and perhaps are confuting a large number of different things that are really quite separate into these terms - as you suggest re SG's 1792 Tonka flavouring. For instance, in some cases people seem to be referring to "soapy" taste and at others to floral overtones. The Kendal companies make such a large range of different tobaccos with different casing and/or top flavouring that it would be hard to take all of them and find some one point of similarity that might be called "lakelandy". It may be that my taste senses are missing something that others can detect, but it does seems unlikely that the Kendal companies would agree to instill some subtle essence of lakeland into all their products, just because they happen to have diverged from the same company many years ago and still be in close proximity. I did check when I was in Kendal that the lakeland air did not have some special floral quality, not found elsewhere in the UK, but (unromantically perhaps) I have to report no essential differences there .


Normally, the blends that are labeled as having some sort of "Lakeland essence" are those with any type of floral or herbal flavorings/toppings added to them. I think that we Americans started using the term "soapy" to describe them because, in our culture, you rarely if ever encounter such tastes or smells in anything other than personal hygiene products and certainly NOT in foods (note that American style aromatics tend to use food type flavorings i.e. vanilla, peach, chocolate, maple, etc).

Conversely, in Britain and in the Commonwealth, it was at one time common to encounter lavender, rose petals, cumin, etc. in desserts, candies, and occasionally even entrees. Hence, to a British pipe smoker in 1900, I imagine that smoking a bowl of Kendal Flake would have had no "soap" connotations at all -- it would have seemed no stranger than for a modern day American to taste vanilla or caramel when he fires up a bowl of 1-Q. I think that's why so many Americans retch at the very thought of many "Lakeland" products -- the only time he has ever encountered anything similar was in the bathroom (or in the stereoptypical "grandma's bedroom"), so it makes them think of smoking soap, cologne, perfume, what-have-you. Or, in the case of Ennerdale, there is both a "soapy" element as well as hints of what I sometimes smell in incense packets ....

I also suspect that many Americans once were also familiar with these "bathroom" products in desserts and tobacco. I've met some older pipe smokers who enjoyed things like Mix 79, which is infamous for it's aftershave/floral taste.

I remember smoking my first bowl of Kendal Cream Flake a couple of years ago. It was my first "Lakeland" type blend. On the one hand I loved it, but on the other the flavor was somewhat jarring. After a few bowls, I realized it was a VERY familiar taste but I simply couldn't place it. It didn't hit me until my wife and I went out to eat at our favorite Indian buffet -- THAT was where I recognized the flavors from! It tasted like a combination of raita and vindaloo .... Damn nice, but damn WEIRD to encounter in my pipe! :smile:

All that being said, I agree that describing all of SG or G&H products as "soapy" is completely off. I think the term "Lakeland" has been affixed to their products because, while not all of their tobaccos have a floral/herbal element, virtually all of the tobaccos commonly available here in the US with a floral/herbal note as from those two blenders -- which explains why the term "Lakeland" is so closely associated with them. But, just like the terms "English" and "Balkan," such a descriptor isn't necessarily correct or precise .....


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

Why doesn't Batman match up to the Green Hornet? :lol:

_Aside: For those interested in classification of fallacies, this one is known as Begging the Question (among other names), whereby a conclusion is offered as part of the question, "When did you stop beating your wife," for example._

I'm not at all sure I agree with the premise that SG is better than GH&Co. SG has nothing that I am aware of that compares with GH&Co.'s best seller, Ennerdale! :biglaugh: As much as I love FVF, I might like Scotch Flake Aromatic every bit as much. To argue that SG fans are in the majority leads us directly to another fallacy and a redefinition of "match-up" as "have the most admirers". "10 billion flies can't be wrong..." Of course, using that definition, the question becomes little more than a tautology -- SG has more votes than GH&Co., that's why! :biglaugh:

BTW, is there a Puff Debating Team? :wink:


----------



## EvoFX (Nov 11, 2008)

question (could have been answered before)

i am not a fan of Lakeland , so how do i tell what GH is LL? does the unscented the only ones that do not have the soapy flavor?


----------



## CaptainEnormous (Sep 30, 2010)

CWL said:


> Y'all,
> 
> Yes, there's no SG left to be found in any quantity in North America, but why is it that there is still plenty of GH around?
> 
> ...


I've smoked mostly G&H and SG products over the last 13 months (since this thread was created), and I think I have some answers to the original questions:

- SG's reputation and relative scarcity is the x-factor. G&H products are in stock 90% of the time, where SG only gets a few shipments per year to the USA. When I place an order, I wouldn't feel pressed to buy a pound of G&H Dark Birdseye because I could get more next week. But I ordered a pound of several SG products without ever having tried them last year, knowing I might not get the chance to buy them in bulk again for quite some time. (for the record, I'm glad I bought all that SG when I did. . .haven't seen it available in bulk since).
- Yes, we're lemmings. 
- I don't know who the lead-lemming is. His identity is secret. But I suspect Greg Pease.


----------



## CaptainEnormous (Sep 30, 2010)

EvoFX said:


> question (could have been answered before)
> 
> i am not a fan of Lakeland , so how do i tell what GH is LL? does the unscented the only ones that do not have the soapy flavor?


Can only comment on what I've ordered personally, but the following have no (or trace, stored-in-the-same-room, amounts) of Lakeland flavoring.

- All the "Unscented" blends
- Dark Birdseye (which I think is Dark Flake Unscented in shag form)
- Black Twist
- Brown "Happy Bogie" Twist
- Kendal Kentucky
- Mixture #5
- Curly Cut Deluxe
- Scottish Mixture
- Coconut Twist

I think there are probably more. Tobaccoreviews.com is a good resource. . .do a G&H search for for blends with "none" in the "Flavoring" category.


----------



## Roqsan (Oct 17, 2010)

CWL said:


> Y'all,
> 
> Yes, there's no SG left to be found in any quantity in North America, but why is it that there is still plenty of GH around?
> 
> ...


The problem for many of us is that a very large number of GH blends - Glengarry, Sam's Choc etc. etc. have a taste that someone on tobacco reviews described as like a particular brand of antiseptic cream (That's exactly the taste I get too). My guess is that this arises from the curing process of one of the tobaccos that GH use in many of their blends; and it's just not that pleasant, although some people don't seem to notice or perhaps like that taste.

On the other hand no SG blends have this distinctive taste and as well as the renowned full virginia flake, they also have some good english mixtures and latakia flakes (eg Navy Flake, Chocolate flake) that aren't over flavoured - they neither taste of antiseptic cream or of any mythical lakeland floral essence.


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

CaptainEnormous said:


> . . .do a G&H search for for blends with "none" in the "Flavoring" category.


It's great idea, but I couldn't find "none" as an option. :dunno: There's "Other/Misc", but that catchall doesn't seem to include "none". Maybe "none" of the GH&Co. line has "none", so they spare you the grief?


----------



## Roqsan (Oct 17, 2010)

One G&H blend that's worth trying if you like virginia flakes is their Bright CR flake. It does to my palette have a faint memory of the antiseptic taste, but in moderation that's not so bad and it has a uniquely mellow taste without the bitter sharpness that some virginias have to a greater or lesser extent.


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

Roqsan said:


> One G&H blend that's worth trying if you like virginia flakes is their Bright CR flake. It does to my palette have a faint memory of the antiseptic taste, but in moderation that's not so bad and it has a uniquely mellow taste without the bitter sharpness that some virginias have to a greater or lesser extent.


One of the "scented" versions that doesn't seem very "Lakelandish" is Scotch Flake Aromatic/Scented. (I assume A/S are the same.) It certainly isn't an aromatic in the American sense -- the room note is just that nasty tobacco smell :lol: -- and no "old lady scented candles" stuff, either. In my mind at least, it's those heliotrope, rose, musk and suchlike weird additives that make for "Lakeland", not the more ordinary things that some people merely don't like, say anise and tonkin bean. Scotch Flake Aromatic is like Bob's Chocolate Flake with the Latakia replaced by an extra helping of chocolate, one of my favorite tobaks.

Plain Scotch Flake is very nice as well.


----------



## Roqsan (Oct 17, 2010)

freestoke said:


> One of the "scented" versions that doesn't seem very "Lakelandish" is Scotch Flake Aromatic/Scented. (I assume A/S are the same.) It certainly isn't an aromatic in the American sense -- the room note is just that nasty tobacco smell :lol: -- and no "old lady scented candles" stuff, either. In my mind at least, it's those heliotrope, rose, musk and suchlike weird additives that make for "Lakeland", not the more ordinary things that some people merely don't like, say anise and tonkin bean. Scotch Flake Aromatic is like Bob's Chocolate Flake with the Latakia replaced by an extra helping of chocolate, one of my favorite tobaks.
> 
> Plain Scotch Flake is very nice as well.


Don't think I've tried that one - I'll have to give it go, nasty tobacco smell is exactly what I like :cowboyic9:, but no :anim_soapbox:!


----------



## CaptainBasil (Nov 25, 2007)

Doc,
Thanks for setting me straight on G & H similar to Samuel Gawith 1792. Got some Dark Flake Scented and it is close. Had the chance to get some 1792 and compare. Somewhat close. 
Your info was great because I love the 1792 and as you know it is not always easy to get. At least now I have something to fall back on and G & H is usually available.
Thanks so much Doc!


----------



## freestoke (Feb 13, 2011)

CaptainBasil said:


> Doc,
> Thanks for setting me straight on G & H similar to Samuel Gawith 1792. Got some Dark Flake Scented and it is close.


I'm surprised. I would have thought the "scented" would have been more along the lines of Brown Flake Scented, which inches toward the Ennerdale side of G&H. Guess it's like the Scotch Flake Scented/Aromatic, not much Lakeland at all.

Roqsan notes, "On the other hand no SG blends have this distinctive taste..." Interesting. I wonder why they call it Lakeland, then. Seems they'd simply call it Hoggarth! Roqsan also offers, "My guess is that this arises from the curing process of one of the tobaccos that GH use in many of their blends." I don't think so. The scent of Ennerdale is not an accidental byproduct of fermentation, it's perfume. The British put it in their candy, too.  Powerful, though, and I suspect it gets on the equipment and permeates the working areas, ghosting other blends that are processed in the same area to a greater or lesser degree. Since Ennerdale is their most popular blend, there's no doubt plenty of that smell to go around.


----------



## Roqsan (Oct 17, 2010)

freestoke said:


> Roqsan also offers, "My guess is that this arises from the curing process of one of the tobaccos that GH use in many of their blends." I don't think so. The scent of Ennerdale is not an accidental byproduct of fermentation, it's perfume. The British put it in their candy, too.  Powerful, though, and I suspect it gets on the equipment and permeates the working areas, ghosting other blends that are processed in the same area to a greater or lesser degree. Since Ennerdale is their most popular blend, there's no doubt plenty of that smell to go around.


Well I agree that many individual tobaccos from both G&H and SG are most certainly scented with various **different** substances of a more or less sinister nature . That's clear.

What I was trying to say though is that many G&H blends have, in addition to whatever flavouring or scent they might add to individual blends, a common underlying base flavour. Since this subtle concept has been confusing to many:ask: here is a food example: All curries have a common base flavour, but you can add additional top flavourings (or perrfumes)... Actually just about the right time to give that a try - if I can find the ingredients.


----------

